DoD Homeland Chief: Assessing Katrina, Still Blaming the MediaDon't you just love it when our Department of Defense examines its role in the Hurricane Katrina disaster and aftermath, and surprisingly finds the U.S. military did an excellent job?
A "news" story from the American Forces Press Service, a tax payer funded media service basically controlled by the Pentagon where seldom is heard a negative word about the military, detailed the supposedly wonderful effort to aid victims of Katrina. I'm sure the thousands of displaced New Orleans residents who lost their loved ones and homes will be happy to know the military is putting itself on the back for the assistance provided, while they waded in the infected waters, endured lack of food and water in the Superdome, and waited for rescue.
Let's go to t
he stunning piece of propaganda, er, news account that appeared on the Pentagon's site on Feb. 6:
> The U.S. military performed admirably as it responded to Hurricane Katrina during the largest, fastest civil support mission in U.S. history - but it needs to do better in the future, according to the Pentagon's chief of homeland security.
> Paul McHale, assistant secretary of defense for homeland security, praised the military response to the catastrophic hurricane in an address to civilian leaders who recently visited the Pentagon. Admirably? I know a few folks who disagree with that glowing assessment.
> Within 10 to 12 days after Hurricane Katrina made landfall along the Gulf Coast on Aug. 29, the military had deployed 72,000 forces, including 50,000 National Guard members, to the region, McHale told the group. In addition, 23 Navy ships and almost 300 helicopters were on the scene, conducting search-and-rescue missions and delivering critically needed humanitarian aid and other support. More than a week, not hours, after Katrina struck the Gulf Coast, huh? I wouldn't label that either admirable or a speedy or rapid deployment of military help for victims of the storm. If it's not too much trouble, maybe one day Paul McHale and his bosses will provide us with answers as to why their help took days to reach the affected disaster area.
> Among the supplies they delivered were more than 30 million packaged meals - "down to the limit of our war reserve and then a little beyond," McHale said. Too bad the meals-ready-to-eat weren't in the mouths and bellies of the people going hungry in the Superdome in the critical first hours of the aftermath.
> But as well as the military performed during Hurricane Katrina, it's critical that it improve on that performance, he told the group. "We take great pride in the military response to Hurricane Katrina, (and) we believe the mission was a success," he said. "But we must do better." No need to page George Orwell. Paul McHale and the Pentagon are quite well-versed in perverted the English language to absolve themselves of any real responsibility for their extremely inadequate response to Katrina. If their response was a "success," how the hell do they define "failure"?
> Despite Katrina's devastation, it's actually on the low end of the type of disasters the Defense Department could be called on to support, McHale said. "We now need to be prepared for the possibility of a catastrophic event that would exceed the loss associated with Katrina," he said. Gosh, if Katrina was the "low end" of homeland disasters the DoD has to deal with, I'd hate to have to depend on the military for a catastrophe on the "high end."
> McHale outlined several areas where improvements are needed -- damage assessment, search and rescue, and communications among them. Wait a minute. Didn't you just say the mission was a success? Well, then why do you need to improve such basic components of the mission?
> DoD needs a faster and more accurate way to assess damage, McHale said. He noted that media reports immediately after Hurricane Katrina made landfall were overly optimistic, with the true nature of the disaster not evident for another 24 to 48 hours.
This is priceless! Who's at fault for the military's late and lame response to the Katrina disaster? The big, bad mainstream media, of course, that's who!
I can't express strongly enough in words how terrified I am that a top person in charge of homeland safety in the event of a disaster is placing blame for inadequate assessments of the devastation and damage on the damn media.
And what is this crock of b.s. they're peddling about "overly optimistic" media reports immediately after Katrina hit land? Maybe Paul McHale and the Pentagon didn't read these papers on
Aug. 30 or these
Aug. 31 publications. > "We cannot rely exclusively or even primarily on media reports, because the media can only cover a part of the picture," he said. "We need a more comprehensive vision of how much damage has been done and what kind of response is appropriate." So all of the billions and billions of tax payer funds DoD receives annually can't give homeland safety personnel a good picture of a natural disaster on American soil, and our military leaders are only now realizing they can't depend on the media to help them deal with a crisis like Katrina.
> To ensure a faster, more accurate assessment in the future, the military needs a reconnaissance capability that's able to quickly deliver aerial imagery of the site, he said. What the hell does this mean? The American military does not yet possess the capability for aerial shots of a disaster on U.S. territory? Someone in Congress should ask what happened to the billions of dollars spent by DoD for aerial surveillance of American soil.
> In addition, responders need better coordination for their search-and-rescue missions, he said. In the rush to rescue victims stranded in the stricken region, the National Guard, active-duty military and civilian agencies all provided helicopter response, but sometimes they were embarking on the same missions without realizing it, he said. Okay, I'm impressed with this smidgen of acceptance of some responsibility for confusion during rescue operations. But it's way too little and too late.
> Hurricane Katrina also drove home the need for better communications among responders, McHale said. During the hurricane response, DoD responders realized their radios weren't interoperable with civilian first responders' radios and communications devices, he said. In some cases, active-duty and National Guard responders couldn't communicate with each other. Hmmm, more than four years after September 11 when communications for responders in New York City were coordinated among the various law enforcement and first-aid forces, DoD admits we still need better communications? Exactly why communications were and are so deficient should be a top priority for the Bush administration, once the president and his advisors are done with shredding more of the U.S. Constitution in their war on terror.
> "I don't mean to exaggerate that deficiency. We were able to communicate," McHale told the group. "But we can do much better if we can design in advance of a crisis a fully interoperable system of communications - not just for voice transmission, but data transmission as well." If? If the world's superpower can't design better communication capability, who can?
> About 7,000 National Guard members who deployed to New Orleans to help restore civil order provided desperately needed support to the city's devastated police force, McHale said. But it quickly became evident that nonlethal weapons could have been a big asset, he said. You might not need to broach the subject of deadly weapons helping restore order, if the Bush administration and DoD had properly prepared for Katrina with essential items like free evacuation buses, shelters to stay in once out of Katrina's deadly path, food, bottled water and medical aid. Those things would have greatly helped prevent the breakdown of civil order.
> "In the United States, we should deploy security forces with the full range of capability - capabilities that include deadly force if that's required, but also capabilities that are less than deadly force," he said.
> This is particularly true when disorder arises from public panic rather than criminal intentions, he said. "So we are now looking at a range of capabilities that would allow us to tailor the package of deployable forces to meet the requirement of security without using excessive force in doing so," he said.
Sounds to me like the Pentagon wants permission to shoot the poor, minorities and anyone desperate for help from our government when the next disaster strikes.
> Since Hurricane Katrina, there's been a reassessment of DoD's role in responding to catastrophic events, McHale told the group. Under current law, the Department of Homeland Security takes the federal lead during major disasters of this type. But McHale said the president needs the flexibility to select whatever agency is best prepared to respond to a particular catastrophic event. Maybe we also need a president who will cut short his endless summer vacation to deal with the next disaster first, then he can think about which agency is best suited for the job.
> Depending on the nature of a catastrophe or attack, that could be the Department of Homeland Security, Department of Health and Human Services, Department of Justice or Department of Defense, he said.
> The lessons of Hurricane Katrina will help the Defense Department ensure it's better prepared to handle a future crisis, McHale told the group.
Ha! About the only lessons DoD has learned is better p.r. spin and a new request to use lethal weapons on U.S. citizens during a disaster.
> "We are very proud of what those 72,000 men and women in uniform did and how rapidly they did it in order to relieve suffering and provide humanitarian assistance (during) what was arguably the most challenging natural disaster in U.S. history," he said. "But with pride earned through their effort, we recognize that the next time around, we have to do better." Hurricane season is just around the corner and people living in areas prone to hurricanes should be aware the federal government and DoD may not be ready for the coming disasters.
